So it's on pace to have a lot more than Maryland in it's "1st" year.

I think a LOT of athletes are waiting to commit to this race. I have 2 people I know that are debating between this race and Louisville but probably won't commit to either until the spring. It's not like there's a discount for early registration. I'm telling both of them to do Muskoka since it's a very hilly course that requires more discipline and a full length swim... and I think mass start.

---

TrainingBible Coaching
http://www.trainingbible.com

What if you KQ at this race? Will you turn it down because you didn't complete an Ironman?

I agree with you. A race with a 2.4 mile swim, 112 mile bike and 26.2 mile run is an Ironman. If the swim is downstream or the bike has a net downhill and tailwind it's still an Ironman, but just an easier/faster one. If a race is short on those distances it doesn't meet the definition of an Ironman regardless of the difficulty.

I did the first IMMT in 2012 - My garmin had the bike course at 177km and the run at 41.8 km. Now I guess I have to have my finishers medal modified and edit Mike Reilly telling me I am an Ironman out of the video. I'm fine with the removal of small out and back - it was only on the first lap which might confuse people since there always seems to be a shocking number of people that don't actually look at the course maps ahead of time at these things, and I imagine it is less likely to piss off the local cottagers who can only access their cottage via that road. If you can't live with yourself doing only 170 k, there are plenty of other options for you. Please take one of the other options if you are fast and M35-39 :)

No two Ironman races are alike. Not all 112 mile bike courses are the same, not all 26.2 mile runs are the same, and no swim is identical. A foolish consistency is not necessary to call it an Ironman. Furthermore, it's WTC's brand, so they can call a 5K race an Ironman if they want to do so. In this case, close is good enough, and I suspect that is the rule for all races. Safety is much more important than exact distances.

But, for A type personalities, decline your Kona spot after winning your age group.

Anyway, if you are a decent climber and want a beautiful venue to do a race, then go to Muskoka.

Btw, the run is not a flat, IM Florida style run. It is a bit challenging.

Don't expect to PR on that course either.

-Robert

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

This thread reminds me of this article.

http://www.outsideonline.com/fitness/bodywork/the-fit-list/Why-American-Endurance-Athletes-Suck.html

That's a fairly normal amount of deviation you had at IMMT, but my opinion is once you have over a 5% reduction in race distance that you're racing a different distance. And don't worry even 10 km less doesn't motivate me to do one.

Then replace the word Ironman with iron-distance. If a race is shorter by a significant amount then it is no longer iron-distance regardless of what name it is given by the organizers.

I bet the rules allow some variation in distances in order to make it easier to create nice, scenic, fast, slow, hilly, whatever you are after courses. I know that for short course ITU 10% variation is OK.

---

Endurance coach | Physiotherapist (primary care) | Bikefitter | Swede

Hmm I wonder if the people who finished IMFL call themselves Ironman or if the RD altered the finisher's medals after they canceled the swim?

It is 5% in ITU. As Robert pointed out this is an Ironman as long as WTC brands it as such, but if you were to go by the 5% rule, which is what I was applying, then this would no longer qualify as iron-distance.

I'm not sure if this was supposed to be pink or not.....

Rod,

It could be.

There are two sides to this.

If Ironman and the "ironman distance" are accepted as some international standard, just as the marathon is an international standard in running, then, there is a view that the expectation is the courses will be of that distance - full stop. I was just at a conference with many of the top running race directors in Canada - one of their obsessions - course accuracy! Some do take this very seriously.


The other view is that, they have an awesome natural loop around the Lake of Bays, in Muskoka, that works out to this distance - it's not way short or way long. It's pretty close. Why complicate things with a few extra kilometers of out and back to make up the distance. Bike road races do this all the time. They say it's 85k or whatever, but it's rarely EXACTLY 85k. Few if any get too worked up about it.

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Thank you for posting this. Quit whining and do the race.

You beat me to it, I was just looking for this post.


This is exactly what they've done in Muskoka. Taken a great venue and fit what will be a great race into it.

---

Rodney
TrainingPeaks | Altra Running | RAD Roller
http://www.goinglong.ca

x2

No need for anyone to be disrespectful to those of us who want the distance to be accurate, and what it said it would be st the time of registration.

I would have no interest in a 24 mile marathon, or any other event of unusual distance. I like comparing my performance over various courses with different levels if difficulty, just to compare for myself. So for me, accurate distance is important. If the distance is short, i will transfer to a different event.

---

_____________________
Don't forget to attack!

I guess you do not get my point. We all do races for different reasons. If you want to pay 700 bucks to do a race that is not an iron distance race, well have at it. If the distance is not an actual iron distance race, I have no interest in spending the premium WTC demands. My guess is that the Muskoka race is in trouble. I doubt this ploy will save it.

So, enjoy your race at Muskoka. Call yourself whatever you want. I really don't care. We will all know the truth about the race. Whether that truth matters is up to each individual person.

(I already have a clock ticking to see who the first idiot is who says I just called the race easy. I do so love the lack of reading comprehension displayed in this forum.)

So for me, accurate distance is important. If the distance is short, i will transfer to a different event.

The great thing about what the WTC has done is athletes now have great options at various IM races around North America!

Don't like expensive hotels with few options such as in Lake Placid - do IMFL or IMAZ

Don't like the heat and humidity of IMLou or IMTX - then look to IMCDA, IMLP or IMC

Don't like the hills of IMWisc, then have a look at IMFL, IMTX or IMAZ

Don't like the "remote" location of IMCDA, then have a look at IMLP, IMLou, IMAZ or the other races that are in larger urban areas.

Don't like some of the IM races that are not that spectator friendly - then look to IMAZ. It's awesome for spectators

Don't like it that the IMMusk bike is slightly short, then look to another IM that YOU KNOW has a bike course with the exact distance.

Want to do an IM that truly has it all - do IM Mont Tremblant. Generally recognized as the best IM in North America!

Easy!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

Was there any specific correspondence to registrants that the course changed? I did not register but if they're changing the bike course from its original distance and layout I would have expected they let the registered participants know. It's unfortunate that this is an issue.

I never received any correspondence that the bike course had changed. I am disappointed about the change if true, but am still happy to be racing in the Muskokas. I have done Muskoka 70.3 three times and it is harder than Mont-Tremblant 70.3 and way way harder than wimpy 70.3s like Timberman. Even with the shortened bike course, I would expect finishing times to be similar to IMLP and possibly a bit longer than IMMT.

Some general comments.

I'm a bit surprised that it wouldn't be closer to 180km IF indeed this is the final course. (and wouldn't be surpised if it changes again slightly in the next 9 months)

Also surprised that Rich hasn't weighed in here yet.

Agree with IanH this will be a hard double loop, hopefully they will continue to work on the paving as there was still some pretty nasty sections.

Am I the only one that wouldn't care if the distances were off by a reasonable percentage? Maybe I'm part of a shrinking minority, but I race to... race?? I'm RACING other competitors who are also racing on the same course. In other words, I'm seeing where I'm stacking up against them. As long as everyone has to race the new distance, what's the big deal?

---

___________________
"TRIATHLON ISN'T ACTUALLY THAT HARD OF A SPORT" -ALISTAIR

IM Muskoka is hardly in trouble with 1000ish registrants with tough competition within the region and timeframe. Within a 3 month span there are 7 WTC IM races in the Eastern US/Canada within driving distance.

There is room for flexibility within the distances (5% for the overall distance) so at 134.4 miles it falls within that rule so it is an iron distance. Period. And remember Muskoka IM 70.3 is actually 71.65 miles, Chattanooga was 146ish and Roth is a bit short but still iron distance.

And what is the truth we will all know? That it was short? OK but then what about the Chattanooga swim where you could float a sub-1hr swim? Or IMNYC which was the same and a "Championship" race too! Or one of the many races that had swims cancelled because of various reasons? Or how about IMTX and the old IMLOU with the heat? IM Tahoe and Boulder with the elevation? You know there is less drag at elevation so the bike course will be fast?

If you don't want to race it, don't. But it doesn't diminish anything for those who do and it doesn't make it a less spectacular course. It's easy to say make a short out and back but that means another road closed, more residents affected and more problems with permits, more volunteers, more timing equipment.

---

Rodney
TrainingPeaks | Altra Running | RAD Roller
http://www.goinglong.ca

X100 on this.

I raced IMC Penticton in 2011 and though the course was beautiful and challenging but that out-n-back leg in Selkirk Valley seemed unnecessary.

---

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's

I dont diminish that it is a spectacular course. I only point out it is not an Ironman....IF you are going to assume, as I do, and many other people do, and as WTC markets, that an ironman is 140.6 miles. So the truth is that some marathons are fast (Berlin), some are down hill (Boston) and some are slow (the one I seem to do). But they are all 26. 2 miles. Not 26.2 miles =/- 1.3 miles. So, I guess Ironman is not 140.6. Its whatever WTC says it is. Cool.

Roth, by the way, is not allowed to call itself Ironman, and I have the same gripe about Chattanooga and its distance (and Victoria and its distance, and IM Nice, and its distance). I really do not see what the big deal is about making a course the correct length. As far as short out and backs go, yes, it would cost more. So what. Its the cost of doing business. I do not see that they cut the fee by 5% when they cut the course by 5%.